Nominee Discussion Thread?

[Flagg]

I think we need to bring back (in some form) a nominee discussion thread where nominated members can be "vetted" by those with counter-evidence. I don't believe the current nomination thread should handle counter-evidence due to its perpetual nature. Any thoughts?

[Knife]

I agree, but I think it should be the Senate where that debate is had. As such, I started a thread there to reflect this.

[Havok]

Obligatory everything should be done in the Senate and the HoC should be shit canned comment.

Why isn't there just a nomination thread for each individual person which then can continue on into the corresponding discussion thread? It is what basically happens anyway. After the nomination is seconded and the initial links are posted, then the thread can open for counter arguments, support or whatever.

It should definitely be held in the Senate though.

[Dominus Atheos]

The current nomination and election process is retarded anyway. If someone wants to nominate someone, they should have to make a thread nominating that person, wait for the discussion, then start a vote thread with a simple up or down vote regardless of how many people have been elected that month. It's ridiculous that only one person can be elected per month, someone has to be elected every month, and you have to vote on multiple people each vote.

[Uraniun235]

They don't have to elect someone every month. If enough Senators refused to cast a vote, then quorum wouldn't be met and the vote would fail.

[Knife]

They don't have to elect someone every month. If enough Senators refused to cast a vote, then quorum wouldn't be met and the vote would fail.

Or my often fought for, none of the above.

[The Romulan Republic]

Obligatory everything should be done in the Senate and the HoC should be shit canned comment.

Why isn't there just a nomination thread for each individual person which then can continue on into the corresponding discussion thread? It is what basically happens anyway. After the nomination is seconded and the initial links are posted, then the thread can open for counter arguments, support or whatever.

It should definitely be held in the Senate though.

Why? Right now we have a position without even a cursory attempt made to back it up.

I have no problem with such discussions occuring in the Senate, but why should they be limited to that forum? The Senate ultimately decides who they want to elect and the HoC can't do squat, but there's no harm in letting everyone else discuss it. Limiting such discussions to the Senate seems like a pointless act of spite, and I will treat it as such until you do us the courtesy of providing even a single supporting argument.

I'm inclined to support the "one thread per nominee" suggestion however, despite some concerns about the number of threads and resulting clutter. But, I see no reason why that should not be in the HoC. If the purpose of vetting is to establish a platform for counter-arguments, outside opinions, and additional evidence, then I submit that the more open and inclusive HoC might be better suited to that purpose.

[Havok]

You want proof? Read through the nomination thread in the HoC. It's a joke. And despite what some say, think or perceive about the Senate, they have not once put up joke nominations or had more than one or two spammy posts in any of the threads in there.

And I also never said that the non Senators couldn't have a discussion thread, I just think that any "official" nominations and discussions should begin and end in there. If there are good points brought up for or against a nominee in an outside thread, I have no doubt they will be cited and brought into the Senate discussion. Hotfoot and Coyote are two that I know have and will continue to do that. In fact Knife did it for this very thread, just in the context of this discussion and not simply a nomination thread.

[The Romulan Republic]

You want proof? Read through the nomination thread in the HoC. It's a joke. And despite what some say, think or perceive about the Senate, they have not once put up joke nominations or had more than one or two spammy posts in any of the threads in there.

I can go read that thread any time I want, but when you make an argument, I believe it is customary for you to do the work of backing it up.

Also, I will state my view that while, if you let everyone comment, you will get stupid opinions from time to time, you will probably also get good ideas that would otherwise never have been heard, that what constitutes a joke nomination or spam can be a matter of opinion and open to debate, and that the idiotic ideas probably don't do any real harm in most cases, other than possibly wasting a bit of everyone's time.

And I also never said that the non Senators couldn't have a discussion thread, I just think that any "official" nominations and discussions should begin and end in there. If there are good points brought up for or against a nominee in an outside thread, I have no doubt they will be cited and brought into the Senate discussion. Hotfoot and Coyote are two that I know have and will continue to do that. In fact Knife did it for this very thread, just in the context of this discussion and not simply a nomination thread.

While I would still prefer that any required thread be in the HoC, this is considerably less objectionable that what I thought you might be arguing, which is that such a discussion should be confined to the Senate. Since you have clarified that issue, consider it dropped.

[Big Phil]

::lol: You want proof? Read through the nomination thread in the HoC. It's a joke. And despite what some say, think or perceive about the Senate, they have not once put up joke nominations or had more than one or two spammy posts in any of the threads in there.

While true, what you instead had was a puffed up sense of their own importance, in the form of ban threads, calls for rules changes, and discussion of "the plebes" as being generally inferior to the "distinguished" senators, as if one's status on a web forum actually means anything. Personally, I'll take a certain level of tongue in check humor and smartassery over pompousness. Of course I'd go one step further and eliminate both the Senate and HoC altogether, and go back Mike, the Admins, and the mods being in charge, but that's not really my call.

And I also never said that the non Senators couldn't have a discussion thread, I just think that any "official" nominations and discussions should begin and end in there. If there are good points brought up for or against a nominee in an outside thread, I have no doubt they will be cited and brought into the Senate discussion. Hotfoot and Coyote are two that I know have and will continue to do that. In fact Knife did it for this very thread, just in the context of this discussion and not simply a nomination thread.

On this point I'd agree with you. There's no real reason for folks not able to vote on the Senate nominations to be discussing the Senate nominations.